AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I wonder if they could even refurbish Pickering As - Unit 1 & 4 were done back in the early 2000s but 2&3 were shutdown.
AoD
AoD
|
|
|
- Thread starter SaugeenJunction
- Start date
dullturtle06
Active Member
Id say just build new ones. They are so old they are shutdown now.
nfitz
Superstar
As far as I know, they are still in almost the same state as when they are shut-down, so there's no new barriers to being refurbished.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
yoshirocks702
Active Member
Refurbishing 1 and 4 should be doable if they are willing to spend the extra money, The reactors were re-tubed in the 80's so they are pretty much the same age as the b side reactors, so everything would need to re-done again. I suppose it depends how desperate they are for the extra 1000MW. I figure if they are spending the money now and its not too much more might as well get all of them done at the same time.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
It might be worth it given we seem to be building a sort of body of expertise in reactor refurbs, with Bruce, Darlington and now Pickering.
AoD
dullturtle06
Active Member
Yes, but the Pickering reactors are smaller than the ones at Darlington or Bruce. The Pickering Block A reactor each had around 500Mw of power production. The ones in Darlington produce 878 Mw. That's why the refurbishment was initially cancelled. The Pickering reactors were to small to justify the cost. The block B should be refurbished to get additional capacity online ASAP. But in my opinion the block A can have a longer timeframe to demolish and rebuild larger reactors, maybe even have a new generation of CANDU developed as part of the project. Canada has had billions in economic development from those previous reactor designs.
nfitz
Superstar
Pickering B are also 500-something - only slightly higher than Pickering A.
I'm not sure how size precludes two of the A reactors, but not the B reactors (or the other 2 A reactors).
Also, I thought the capacity at the two A reactors went up a bit during the refurb ... thought it's hard to say, the numbers I am seeing are all over the place.
Haljackey
Active Member
...Should a separate thread be made for Pickering? Perhaps one for Darlington while we're at it?
Or just rename this thread to 'Nuclear Power infrastructure' or something instead?
The last few posts have nothing to do with the proposed new nuclear build at the Bruce site.
Or just rename this thread to 'Nuclear Power infrastructure' or something instead?
The last few posts have nothing to do with the proposed new nuclear build at the Bruce site.
Bureaucromancer
Active Member
I’d support a nuclear power thread.
just east of the creek
Active Member
Not sure a new thread on Nuclear Power or Storage was started, so I will post here for now.
I ran across this article, I do not know much about the program, except in generalities, and cannot comment on the science and engineering involved, but this is of interest given the discussions ongoing in Ontario.
www.thecooldown.com
I ran across this article, I do not know much about the program, except in generalities, and cannot comment on the science and engineering involved, but this is of interest given the discussions ongoing in Ontario.
Finland is on the verge of an incredible human-made alteration deep beneath the Earth: 'They'll hold a total of 5,500 tonnes of waste'
Finland's Onkalo project represents a monumental leap toward curbing nuclear waste and safeguarding the environment.
www.thecooldown.com